If 4K and the 70D autofocus is introduced to 5D, I would sell my 5D MK III, even at half price, to fund it.

I never shoot video and am quite content with my 5D3 autofocus so I call DIBS! on your 5D3 at half price . . .

Understood,Don't get me wrong, as a still gear it is one of the greatest cameras I have ever used. What doesn't make it the perfect one in my eyes is the lack of these two video features. I would pay, if they introduce the dual pixel and 4k for an additional price. Different market for different needs, I guess.

If Canon puts 4k into the 5Dmk4, it'll probably be a 8bit 4:2:0 internal recording just like the GH4. Possibly 4:2:2 8bit to an external recorder, but I don't see them doing much more than that. Anything else would essentially eliminate the 1Dc in the eyes of any indie film maker, as well as anyone that doesn't need to do any kind of heavy grading.

If Canon puts 4k into the 5Dmk4, it'll probably be a 8bit 4:2:0 internal recording just like the GH4. Possibly 4:2:2 8bit to an external recorder, but I don't see them doing much more than that. Anything else would essentially eliminate the 1Dc in the eyes of any indie film maker, as well as anyone that doesn't need to do any kind of heavy grading.

My fear is that the 4k it delivers will be marginally better than 5D3 ML RAW and that ML RAW for 1080p won't be possible on the new 5D4.

I hope they notice that as soon as ML RAW came out the 5D3 prices, which had been sinking a lot, shoot right back up to MSRP at most stores for some time. And stop crippling everything to pieces. It's a joke how much better ML gets out of the 5D3 than the Canon firmware alone.

I partitulary hate how Canon has pushed DIGIC processing more and more to the DNR everything to mush that a few studios sadly use on blu-rays at times. As soon as an area doesn't have brightness and extreme contrast DIGIC just turns things to 100% mush. But even in the crisp areas I don't know what they are doing. Sometimes I swear Canon marketing literally had them add a minor Gaussian blur filter in the video output stage. But it might just well be that DIGIC video processing is THAT bad. Maybe it is, there must be some reason they suck with old Canon video processing chips for the C100 and all instead of using any of the much newer DIGICs to read the sensor and do basic processing.

Anyway one would hope they are smart and give the 5D4 1080p RAW out natively and 4k compressed, but a good quality 4k and not low color and not mush and hopefully 10bits. Giving it all the hardware can do is the way to take the world by storm again. Video world moves fast and the film guys don't get into fanboy nonsense and unless Canon pushes max fast they won't ever make a big splash in low to mid-end again.

This might be disappointing news, as Canon might use 4K to differentiate the 7D replacement from the 5D replacement, meaning the 7D replacement wouldn't get 4K. That would be the disappointing part.

I can't speak to the features of the 5D III replacement, but the 7D II absolutely 100% will not have 4k video.

Is that an opinion, or do you have information?

If Canon leaves 4K video out of the 7D II (or 5D mk IV), I think it would be a mistake. I know a lot of people in this forum default to the "most consumers don't have 4K TVs" argument, or the "Canon must protect the Cinema-series" argument, but both viewpoints are frankly myopic.

1) The 7D II won't be aimed at "most consumers"; it will be aimed at the sort of people with the disposable income for a $2000 product that entails lots of equally expensive accessories. Perhaps 4K TVs occupy relatively little market share overall, but what is their share among affluent buyers who might make up a greater proportion of the potential 7D II user base? What share will 4K sets have among these buyers next year, when the 7D II will presumably be at full availability?

2) Even if 4K isn't your delivery output, the extra resolution has lots of benefits, from the ability to crop into footage, to the ability to create sharper/ better stabilized 1080p footage, to the ability (with shutter speed and codec limitations) to pull a perfectly usable, print-worthy photo from moving footage. Speaking as a professional journalist (surely a core part of the 7D II's would-be user base), these functions are valuable. They'll be valuable for other professional users, too, to say nothing of enthusiasts. Yes, Canon might prefer that pros and enthusiasts purchase the next-gen C100 or something, but there's a clear demand for convergent photo-video tools, and the competition is already starting to accommodate it. Canon's staved off user loss so far thanks to lock-in from its lens ecosystem, but there's a turning point for everything. How long will Canon customers buy what Canon wants to sell instead of what consumers want? Sometimes Canon reminds me of Microsoft is this regard. Protectionist tactics have historically hit walls. Some argue that Canon sells DSLRs primarily for still features, and that video ones won't make-or-break sales on a large scale. Maybe we'll see.

3) Building on the above point... 4K isn't a necessity today, per se, but the 7D II will probably be replaced on a three-to-four-year cycle. By 2017, will 4K really be so optional? Even if Canon achieves strong early 7D II sales without 4K, what will the long-tail sales look like, as competitors bring worthier models to market? I suppose Canon could always accelerate its release cycle, but not many companies have success with that model when it comes to high-end hardware.

4) TVs and professional use cases are only part of the 4K equation. New computers already offer greater-than-1080p resolution, and over the next few years, monitors of greater and greater pixel density will become more common. Again, if we're looking forward to 2017 or so, and we're thinking of the sort of user who would own a $2000+ camera, what kind of computer gear do you think this user is going to have? There's a recurring rumor that Apple will launch 4K iMacs in the near future. If that happens, it will surely drive demand (again, among influential, affluent buyers) for 4K-capable DSLRs.

5) The "Canon needs to protect the 1DC" argument also shouldn't prevent a 4K-capable 7D II. The 1DC isn't a new camera. It's one thing to protect a product from cannibalization when it's been on the market for less than a year. But today, the 1DC isn't necessarily a better option than the GH4, at least not if you're oriented more toward video than stills but need both, and is surely due for an upgrade of its own. It makes no sense to think about the 7D II cannibalizing the current Cinema-series cameras; it makes sense to think about how 7D II video features might cannibalize the next generation's. This line of thinking offers much more latitude for product segmentation. The 1DC mK II, for example, might record internal 10-bit 4K to CFast, or using some new, efficient H265 codec, etc-- whereas the 7D II could record only internal 8-bit 4:2:0 4K. The 1DC Mk II could offer more frame rate options, or more professional profiles, zebras and focus peaking, and so on. If we're thinking of the 1-DC as a tool for professionals, it's insane to think that bare-bones 4K features in a 7D (or 5D, for that matter) would take away sales.

6) By 2016, I suspect it's going to be hard for Canon to keep 4K out of its Rebel line-- because everyone else will have implemented it by then. Panasonic is putting 4K in everything right now, and more are coming. If Canon doesn't plan to release a 4K-capable 7D II until, say, early 2014, what kind of upgrade path is it offering? Again, I suppose Canon might have a speedier refresh cycle in mind than anyone suspects.

Does this mean Canon will include 4K in any of the upcoming DSLRs besides the 1DC successor? Who knows. But as my above points explained, I see more risk than reward in being conservative, and I see no reason 4K-capable DSLRs have to cannibalize C-series sales, at least not among the core pro users who justify those cameras' high-margin prices to begin with.

EDIT: After thinking for a minute, it occurs to me that if Canon actually has some amazing new sensor that creates meaningfully better stills (per the rumor about the private demos involving a special monitor), then maybe the company has more leverage than I expect. If the images are amazing, or there's some other new tech involved (new AF, etc), maybe the stills guys will flock to the model, regardless of whatever Canon does with video. But still, I think the point remains-- it seems more stubborn than sensible for Canon to leave 4K out of its next-gen pro cameras. And since it doesn't offer the video people anything comparable at the price (or anything close to it), it seems like a needless risk.

New features are typically introduced in lower end models.... not high end models.

"You can't put 4K video in the 5D4 because you have to protect the 1DC" By the same logic, you can't put 2K video into the T3i because you have to protect the 1DX... yet there it is.

Look at it another way.... "you can't put feature X in a camera that sells by the millions to protect camera Y that sells by the thousands" Where is the money? The money is in the low end cameras. Canon has probably made more money with the t3i than the 1DC, the 1DX, the 5D3, and the 7D put together... it has certainly sold at least 20 times as much t3i's than all of those high end cameras.... Which one do you think they would want to protect?

This might be disappointing news, as Canon might use 4K to differentiate the 7D replacement from the 5D replacement, meaning the 7D replacement wouldn't get 4K. That would be the disappointing part.

I can't speak to the features of the 5D III replacement, but the 7D II absolutely 100% will not have 4k video.

Is that an opinion, or do you have information?

If Canon leaves 4K video out of the 7D II (or 5D mk IV), I think it would be a mistake. I know a lot of people in this forum default to the "most consumers don't have 4K TVs" argument, or the "Canon must protect the Cinema-series" argument, but both viewpoints are frankly myopic.

1) The 7D II won't be aimed at "most consumers"; it will be aimed at the sort of people with the disposable income for a $2000 product that entails lots of equally expensive accessories. Perhaps 4K TVs occupy relatively little market share overall, but what is their share among affluent buyers who might make up a greater proportion of the potential 7D II user base? What share will 4K sets have among these buyers next year, when the 7D II will presumably be at full availability?

2) Even if 4K isn't your delivery output, the extra resolution has lots of benefits, from the ability to crop into footage, to the ability to create sharper/ better stabilized 1080p footage, to the ability (with shutter speed and codec limitations) to pull a perfectly usable, print-worthy photo from moving footage. Speaking as a professional journalist (surely a core part of the 7D II's would-be user base), these functions are valuable. They'll be valuable for other professional users, too, to say nothing of enthusiasts. Yes, Canon might prefer that pros and enthusiasts purchase the next-gen C100 or something, but there's a clear demand for convergent photo-video tools, and the competition is already starting to accommodate it. Canon's staved off user loss so far thanks to lock-in from its lens ecosystem, but there's a turning point for everything. How long will Canon customers buy what Canon wants to sell instead of what consumers want? Sometimes Canon reminds me of Microsoft is this regard. Protectionist tactics have historically hit walls. Some argue that Canon sells DSLRs primarily for still features, and that video ones won't make-or-break sales on a large scale. Maybe we'll see.

3) Building on the above point... 4K isn't a necessity today, per se, but the 7D II will probably be replaced on a three-to-four-year cycle. By 2017, will 4K really be so optional? Even if Canon achieves strong early 7D II sales without 4K, what will the long-tail sales look like, as competitors bring worthier models to market? I suppose Canon could always accelerate its release cycle, but not many companies have success with that model when it comes to high-end hardware.

4) TVs and professional use cases are only part of the 4K equation. New computers already offer greater-than-1080p resolution, and over the next few years, monitors of greater and greater pixel density will become more common. Again, if we're looking forward to 2017 or so, and we're thinking of the sort of user who would own a $2000+ camera, what kind of computer gear do you think this user is going to have? There's a recurring rumor that Apple will launch 4K iMacs in the near future. If that happens, it will surely drive demand (again, among influential, affluent buyers) for 4K-capable DSLRs.

5) The "Canon needs to protect the 1DC" argument also shouldn't prevent a 4K-capable 7D II. The 1DC isn't a new camera. It's one thing to protect a product from cannibalization when it's been on the market for less than a year. But today, the 1DC isn't necessarily a better option than the GH4, at least not if you're oriented more toward video than stills but need both, and is surely due for an upgrade of its own. It makes no sense to think about the 7D II cannibalizing the current Cinema-series cameras; it makes sense to think about how 7D II video features might cannibalize the next generation's. This line of thinking offers much more latitude for product segmentation. The 1DC mK II, for example, might record internal 10-bit 4K to CFast, or using some new, efficient H265 codec, etc-- whereas the 7D II could record only internal 8-bit 4:2:0 4K. The 1DC Mk II could offer more frame rate options, or more professional profiles, zebras and focus peaking, and so on. If we're thinking of the 1-DC as a tool for professionals, it's insane to think that bare-bones 4K features in a 7D (or 5D, for that matter) would take away sales.

6) By 2016, I suspect it's going to be hard for Canon to keep 4K out of its Rebel line-- because everyone else will have implemented it by then. Panasonic is putting 4K in everything right now, and more are coming. If Canon doesn't plan to release a 4K-capable 7D II until, say, early 2014, what kind of upgrade path is it offering? Again, I suppose Canon might have a speedier refresh cycle in mind than anyone suspects.

Does this mean Canon will include 4K in any of the upcoming DSLRs besides the 1DC successor? Who knows. But as my above points explained, I see more risk than reward in being conservative, and I see no reason 4K-capable DSLRs have to cannibalize C-series sales, at least not among the core pro users who justify those cameras' high-margin prices to begin with.

EDIT: After thinking for a minute, it occurs to me that if Canon actually has some amazing new sensor that creates meaningfully better stills (per the rumor about the private demos involving a special monitor), then maybe the company has more leverage than I expect. If the images are amazing, or there's some other new tech involved (new AF, etc), maybe the stills guys will flock to the model, regardless of whatever Canon does with video. But still, I think the point remains-- it seems more stubborn than sensible for Canon to leave 4K out of its next-gen pro cameras. And since it doesn't offer the video people anything comparable at the price (or anything close to it), it seems like a needless risk.

ITshooter...i'm sure you made some good points but man, how much time did you spend writing all that? lol

My primary application for 4k is aggressively stabilized video that can still be downres'd to FHD. Try shooting video from a waterskiing boat or a full scale helicopter handheld (i.e. without a stabilized gimbal system) and you'll see how that can be useful.

For those talking about the 5D4 with 4K taking away from the 1DC, try to keep in mind that 8K is already on the horizon, and I'd be surprised if Canon aren't already working on a 1DC replacement with just that.

Logged

Some cameras… With Canon written on them. Oh, and some lenses… Also with Canon written on them. Oh, and a shiny camera with Fuji written on it too...

My primary application for 4k is aggressively stabilized video that can still be downres'd to FHD. Try shooting video from a waterskiing boat or a full scale helicopter handheld (i.e. without a stabilized gimbal system) and you'll see how that can be useful.